The complexity of cancer chemotherapy requires that pharmacists be familiar with the complicated regimens and highly toxic agents used. This column reviews various issues related to preparation, dispensing, and administration of antineoplastic therapy and the agents, both commercially available and investigational, used to treat malignant diseases.
Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group.Polychemotherapy for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet.1998; 352(9132): 930–942.
2.
French Epirubicin Study Group.A prospective randomized phase III trial comparing combination chemotherapy with cyclophsphamide, fluorouracil, and either doxorubicin or epirubicin. J Clin Oncol.1988; 6(4): 679–688.
3.
Italian Multicentric Study with Epirubicin.Phase III randomised study of fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide v fluorouracil, doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide in advanced breast cancer: an Italian multicenter trial. J Clin Oncol.1988; 6(6): 976–982.
4.
BrambillaC., RossiA., BonfanteV.Phase II study of doxorubicin vs. epirubicin in advanced breast cancer. Cancer Treat Rep.1986; 70(2): 261–266.
5.
BrufmanG., ColajoriE., GhilezanN.Doubling epirubicin dose intensity (100 mg/m2 versus 50 mg/m2) in the FEC regimen significantly increases response rates. An international randomized phase III study in metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol.1997; 8(2): 155–162.
6.
BironP., DurandM., RochéH.Pegase 03: a prospective randomized phase III trial of FEC with or without high-dose thiotepa, cyclophosphamide and autologous stem cell transplantation in first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Bone Marrow Transplant.2008; 41(6): 555–562.
7.
BonneterreJ., RochéH., KerbratP.Long-term cardiac follow-up in relapse-free patients after six courses of fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide, with either 50 or 100 mg of epirubicin, as adjuvant therapy for node-positive breast cancer. French Adjuvant Study Group. J Clin Oncol.2004; 22(15): 3070–3079.
8.
BonneterreJ., RochéH., KerbratP.Epirubicin increases long-term survival in adjuvant chemotherapy of patients with poor-prognosis, node-positive, early breast cancer: 10-year follow-up results of the French Adjuvant Group 05 randomized trial. J Clin Oncol.2005; 23(12): 2686–2693.
9.
The French Adjuvant Study Group.Benefit of high-dose epirubicin regimen in adjuvant chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer patients with poor prognostic factors: 5-year follow-up results of French Adjuvant Study Group 05 randomized trial. J Clin Oncol.2001; 19(3): 602–611.
10.
BonneterreJ., BercezC., BonneterreM.E.Cost-effectiveness analysis of breast cancer adjuvant treatment: FEC 50 versus FEC 100 (FASG05 study). Ann Oncol.2005; 16(6): 915–922.
11.
KerbratP., RochéH., BonneterreJ.Epirubicin-vinorelbine vs FEC 100 for node-positive, early breast cancer: French Adjuvant Study Group 09 trial. Br J Cancer.2007; 96(11): 1633–1638.
12.
ToiM., NakamuraS., KuroiK.Phase II study of preoperative sequential FEC and docetaxel predicts of pathological response and disease free survival. Breast Cancer Res Treat.2008; 110(3): 531–539.
13.
IwataH., NakamuraS., ToiM.Interim analysis of a phase II trial of cyclophosphamide, epirubicin and 5-fluorouracil (CEF) followed by docetaxel as preoperative chemotherapy for early stage breast carcinoma. Breast Cancer.2005; 12(2): 99–103.
14.
DangC.T., D'AndreaG.M., MoynahanM.E.Phase II study of feasibility of dose-dense FEC followed by alternating weekly taxanes in high-risk, four or more node-positive breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res.2004; 10(17): 5754–5761.
KrisM.G., HeskethP.J., SomerfieldM.R.American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline for antiemetics in oncology: update 2006. J Clin Oncol.2006; 24(18): 2932–2947.
MartinM.The severity and pattern of emesis following different cytotoxic agents. Oncology.1996; 53(Suppl 1): 26–31.
21.
BeckT.M.The pattern of emesis following high-dose cyclophosphamide and the anti-emetic efficacy of ondansetron. Anticancer Drugs.1995; 6(2): 237–242.
22.
GelingO., EichlerH.G.Should 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonists be administered beyond 24 hours after chemotherapy to prevent delayed emesis? Systematic re-evaluation of clinical evidence and drug cost implications. J Clin Oncol.2005; 23(6): 1289–1294.
23.
TerreyJ.P., AaproM.S.The activity of granisetron in patients who had previously failed ondansetron antiemetic therapy. Eur J Clin Res.1996; 8: 281–288.
24.
CarmichaelJ., KeizerH.J., CupissolD., MilliezJ., ScheidelP., SchindlerA.E.Use of granisetron in patients refractory to previous treatment with antiemetics. Anticancer Drugs.1998; 9(5): 381–385.
25.
de WitR., de BoerA.C., vd LindenG.H., StoterG., SparreboomA., VerweijJ.Effective cross-over to granisetron after failure to ondansetron, a randomized double blind study in patients failing ondansetron plus dexamethasone during the first 24 hours following highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Br J Cancer.2001; 85(8): 1099–1101.
26.
SmithI.E.A dose-finding study of granisetron, a novel antiemetic, in patients receiving cytostatic chemotherapy. The Granisetron Study Group. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol.1993; 119(6): 350–354.
27.
SoukopM.A dose-finding study of granisetron, a novel antiemetic, in patients receiving high-dose cisplatin. Granisetron Study Group. Support Care Cancer.1994; 2(3): 177–183.
28.
StillwellT.J., BensonR.C.Cyclophosphamide-induced hemorrhagic cystitis. A review of 100 patients. Cancer.1988; 61(3): 451–457.
ZanottiK.M., MarkhamM.Prevention and management of antineoplastic-induced hypersensitivity reactions. Drug Saf.2001; 24(10): 767–779.
31.
SmithT.J., KhatcheressianJ., LymanG.H.2006 update of recommendations for the use of white blood cell growth factors: an evidence-based clinical practice guideline. J Clin Oncol.2006; 24(19): 3187–3205.
LarsonD.L.Treatment of tissue extravasation by antitumor agents. Cancer.1982; 49(9): 1796–1799.
34.
LarsonD.L.What is the appropriate management of tissue extravasation by antitumor agents?Plast Reconstr Surg.1985; 75(3): 397–405.
35.
MullinS., BeckwithM.C., TylerL.S.Prevention and management of antineoplastic extravasation injury. Hosp Pharm.2000; 35(1): 57–74.
36.
BensonA.B., AjaniJ.A., CatalanoR.B.Recommended guidelines for the treatment of cancer treatment-induced diarrhea. J Clin Oncol.2004; 22(14): 2918–2926.
37.
PattersonW.P., ReamsG.P.Renal and electrolyte abnormalities due to chemotherapy. In: PerryM.C., ed. The Chemotherapy Sourcebook.3rd ed.Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2001; 494–504.
38.
FloydJ., MirzaI., SachsB., PerryM.C.Hepatotoxicity of chemotherapy. Semin Oncol.2006; 33(1): 50–67.
39.
KintzelP.E., DorrR.T.Anticancer drug renal toxicity and elimination: dosing guidelines for altered renal function. Cancer Treat Rev.1995; 21(1): 33–64.
40.
KingP.D., PerryM.C.Hepatotoxicity of chemotherapy. Oncologist.2001; 6(2): 162–176.
41.
DobbsN.A., TwelvesC.J., GregoryW., CruickshankaC., RichardsM.A., RubensR.D.Epirubicin in patients with liver dysfunction: development and evaluation of a novel dose modification scheme. Eur J Cancer.2003; 39(5): 580–586.
